The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 4 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
As of 1 July 2024, you may notice a temporary increase in the numbers of X profiles with Unknown location. Click here to learn more.
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output.
Click here to find out more.
X Demographics
Mendeley readers
Attention Score in Context
| Title |
Heavy Metal Tolerance in Plants: Role of Transcriptomics, Proteomics, Metabolomics, and Ionomics
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Frontiers in Plant Science, February 2016
|
| DOI | 10.3389/fpls.2015.01143 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Samiksha Singh, Parul Parihar, Rachana Singh, Vijay P. Singh, Sheo M. Prasad |
| Abstract |
Heavy metal contamination of soil and water causing toxicity/stress has become one important constraint to crop productivity and quality. This situation has further worsened by the increasing population growth and inherent food demand. It has been reported in several studies that counterbalancing toxicity due to heavy metal requires complex mechanisms at molecular, biochemical, physiological, cellular, tissue, and whole plant level, which might manifest in terms of improved crop productivity. Recent advances in various disciplines of biological sciences such as metabolomics, transcriptomics, proteomics, etc., have assisted in the characterization of metabolites, transcription factors, and stress-inducible proteins involved in heavy metal tolerance, which in turn can be utilized for generating heavy metal-tolerant crops. This review summarizes various tolerance strategies of plants under heavy metal toxicity covering the role of metabolites (metabolomics), trace elements (ionomics), transcription factors (transcriptomics), various stress-inducible proteins (proteomics) as well as the role of plant hormones. We also provide a glance of some strategies adopted by metal-accumulating plants, also known as "metallophytes." |
X Demographics
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 4 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 50% |
| Science communicators (journalists, bloggers, editors) | 1 | 25% |
| Scientists | 1 | 25% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 993 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| France | 1 | <1% |
| Unknown | 992 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 167 | 17% |
| Student > Master | 108 | 11% |
| Researcher | 106 | 11% |
| Student > Bachelor | 99 | 10% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 45 | 5% |
| Other | 139 | 14% |
| Unknown | 329 | 33% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 289 | 29% |
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 135 | 14% |
| Environmental Science | 88 | 9% |
| Chemistry | 27 | 3% |
| Chemical Engineering | 13 | 1% |
| Other | 75 | 8% |
| Unknown | 366 | 37% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 February 2024.
All research outputs
#6,189,007
of 23,775,451 outputs
Outputs from Frontiers in Plant Science
#3,230
of 21,845 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#98,876
of 402,799 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Frontiers in Plant Science
#63
of 484 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,775,451 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 73rd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 21,845 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 402,799 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 75% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 484 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% of its contemporaries.